The Ties that Bind or Those That Tear Us Apart? Co-CEO Constellations and ESG Performance in Family Firms
While the prevailing perspective on executive leadership has emphasized the effectiveness of a unified command structure, family firms frequently adopt shared leadership structures, such as dyads, triads, or larger co-CEO constellations. Given the widespread use of such structures in family firms, i...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | IE |
| Repositorio: | Repositorio IE |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.ie.edu:20.500.14417/4221 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-025-05946-6 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14417/4221 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-025-05946-6 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | 53 Ciencias Económicas::5311 Organización y dirección de empresas ODS 12 - Producción y consumo responsables Co-CEOs Family firms ESG performance |
| Sumario: | While the prevailing perspective on executive leadership has emphasized the effectiveness of a unified command structure, family firms frequently adopt shared leadership structures, such as dyads, triads, or larger co-CEO constellations. Given the widespread use of such structures in family firms, it becomes imperative to understand how family involvement in the firm shapes the dynamics of co-CEO constellations and their implications for firm outcomes. Drawing upon the socioemotional wealth (SEW) perspective, we propose that the salience of extended SEW concerns increases the costs associated with a shared leadership structure. These elevated costs, in turn, result in adverse environmental, social, and governance (ESG) outcomes. Our empirical analysis, based on panel data from 76 Italian firms listed on the Milan Stock Exchange during 2003–2020, suggests that family firms employing a co-CEO structure tend to exhibit lower ESG performance, while a positive relationship emerges in nonfamily firms. We theorize and find empirical support that the negative effect for family firms stems from family-induced cognitive diversity, manifested via the inclusion of both family and nonfamily members or family members from different generations in the co-CEO constellation. Importantly, we identify a key mitigating factor: when one of the co-CEOs also holds the position of the board chair, the negative impact of the co-CEO structure on ESG performance is mitigated and even turns positive. These findings advance our understanding of how family involvement in the shared leadership structure shapes a firm’s ethical orientation, having important implications for the governance of family firms. |
|---|